 |
|
lmfao again - tiny sample sizes using % gain and NOT
Posted on: February 14, 2019 at 12:27:39 CT
90Tiger STL
Posts:
163604
Member For:
23.38 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
5
looking at aggregate data.
You're cherry picking, and it's obvious.
The findings are eye opening.
Between 2007 and 2016, all but three of the 25 highest-tax states lost population. The 5 biggest losers: New York (which lost 1.3 million), California (-928,627), Illinois (-717,445), and New Jersey (-516,326), and Ohio (-346,792).
At the other end of the spectrum, all but five low-tax states gained population. The biggest winners: Texas (1.4 million), Florida (845,239), North Carolina (549,148), South Carolina (361,117), Washington (313,722).
All told, the 25 high-tax states saw a net loss of 4.9 million people to states with lower tax burdens.
You're cherry picking, and it's obvious.
The findings are eye opening.
Between 2007 and 2016, all but three of the 25 highest-tax states lost population. The 5 biggest losers: New York (which lost 1.3 million), California (-928,627), Illinois (-717,445), and New Jersey (-516,326), and Ohio (-346,792).
At the other end of the spectrum, all but five low-tax states gained population. The biggest winners: Texas (1.4 million), Florida (845,239), North Carolina (549,148), South Carolina (361,117), Washington (313,722).
All told, the 25 high-tax states saw a net loss of 4.9 million people to states with lower tax burdens.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
- 
lmfao again - tiny sample sizes using % gain and NOT - 90Tiger MU - 2/14 12:27:39